Iman Shumpert
http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=iman-shumpert&i=1&p1=vander-blue
About the same size. Vander shot better from 3, and overall, than Shumpert did his last year in college.
Quote from: Terror Skink on May 05, 2013, 04:23:51 PM
Iman Shumpert
http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=iman-shumpert&i=1&p1=vander-blue
About the same size. Vander shot better from 3, and overall, than Shumpert did his last year in college.
Shumpert's rebounding, assist, and steals numbers were way better than Vander's though.
Quote from: TrueBlueAndGold on May 05, 2013, 04:29:02 PM
Shumpert's rebounding, assist, and steals numbers were way better than Vander's though.
I think that's key. He was 7th in the nation during his last year at GT.
Quote from: TrueBlueAndGold on May 05, 2013, 04:29:02 PM
Shumpert's rebounding, assist, and steals numbers were way better than Vander's though.
That's true...and Vander's rebounding was better his sophomore year though.
But the larger point is that NBA execs are going to look for potential, the ability to learn and be a good teammate. I'm watching this Knick/Pacer game and Lance Stephenson is all over the place. Now I know that Vander isn't nearly Stephenson, but I remember when he came out and sat on the bench most of his rookie year and how criticized he was. But he learned...got better...and now he's a really good player.
All it takes is for one team to see that in Vander and he can stick.
Quote from: TrueBlueAndGold on May 05, 2013, 04:29:02 PM
Shumpert's rebounding, assist, and steals numbers were way better than Vander's though.
Lol.
Quote from: Terror Skink on May 05, 2013, 04:34:25 PM
That's true...and Vander's rebounding was better his sophomore year though.
But the larger point is that NBA execs are going to look for potential, the ability to learn and be a good teammate. I'm watching this Knick/Packer game and Lance Stephenson is all over the place. Now I know that Vander isn't nearly Stephenson, but I remember when he came out and sat on the bench most of his rookie year and how criticized he was. But he learned...got better...and now he's a really good player.
All it takes is for one team to see that in Vander and he can stick.
+1000
You're cherry-picking a bit here, playing up a few similarities while ignoring that there are some pretty large differences between the two. I really don't see them as similar players at all.
Shumpert is bigger and stronger (has 20+ pounds on Vander), probably more athletic, proved in college he could play the point and is a better defender ... which isn't a knock on Vander's defense, just that Shumpert is really good defensively.
People say JJJ is like shumpert...hope so, how nice would that be?
As disappointed as I was that he wouldn't be back leading us for a final four/national championship push next year, I never thought it was a terrible idea for him to bolt after this year. The more I think about it, the better and better the decision seems. I really hope it all works out for him. He's a huge part of MU history. Turned the tide on in-state recruiting by spurning UW (which was and still remains AWESOME), and hit two massive game winners to deliver MU results not seen in a decade. His midrange game was the best I've seen since I've been following the team (2002), and it's really not hard to project that he'll extend that range with hard work over the next few years. The better he does at the next level, the more it will pay dividends in recruiting down the road. I wouldn't be shocked to see him go first round, but I'll be on the edge of my seat on draft night 'til he hears his name called regardless.
Quote from: GoldenZebra on May 05, 2013, 05:12:46 PM
People say JJJ is like shumpert...hope so, how nice would that be?
I've seen that comparison made several times, but I just don't see it. Shumpert is/was a big point/part time off guard. I don't see JJJ playing point at any level. I think a good comparison style-wise for his game in the film I've seen on top of his measurables is Jeremy Lamb.
Quote from: Pakuni on May 05, 2013, 05:11:50 PM
You're cherry-picking a bit here, playing up a few similarities while ignoring that there are some pretty large differences between the two. I really don't see them as similar players at all.
Shumpert is bigger and stronger (has 20+ pounds on Vander), probably more athletic, proved in college he could play the point and is a better defender ... which isn't a knock on Vander's defense, just that Shumpert is really good defensively.
Good point about the point guard...but he doesn't do that in the NBA. You are correct that he is bigger.
Quote from: Terror Skink on May 05, 2013, 05:24:12 PM
Good point about the point guard...but he doesn't do that in the NBA. You are correct that he is bigger.
Shumpert is 6ft 5 and goes 220. I don't think he was that big coming out two years ago, but he is very well built now. He is a great defender and his shot has improved over the past two years. Should have played more today as opposed to 40 year old Jason Kidd.
Quote from: nyg on May 05, 2013, 06:36:13 PM
Shumpert is 6ft 5 and goes 220. I don't think he was that big coming out two years ago, but he is very well built now. He is a great defender and his shot has improved over the past two years. Should have played more today as opposed to 40 year old Jason Kidd.
Experience counts for something.
Didn't count for much today. 17 minutes...0 points....2 rebounds...1 assist...1 turnover.
Shumpert played 33 minutes and did OK.
Quote from: Jajuannaman on May 05, 2013, 05:13:21 PM
As disappointed as I was that he wouldn't be back leading us for a final four/national championship push next year, I never thought it was a terrible idea for him to bolt after this year. The more I think about it, the better and better the decision seems. I really hope it all works out for him. He's a huge part of MU history. Turned the tide on in-state recruiting by spurning UW (which was and still remains AWESOME), and hit two massive game winners to deliver MU results not seen in a decade. His midrange game was the best I've seen since I've been following the team (2002), and it's really not hard to project that he'll extend that range with hard work over the next few years. The better he does at the next level, the more it will pay dividends in recruiting down the road. I wouldn't be shocked to see him go first round, but I'll be on the edge of my seat on draft night 'til he hears his name called regardless.
Well said, I think Vander is going to surprise a lot of people in the Draft, a first round selection is not out of the question. Vander has something special in his game that will catch the eye of a GM somewhere. I think his intangibles, defense, and athletic ability will find him a nice home somewhere in the NBA.
I think a good comparison is Aaron Brooks.
Quote from: TrueBlueAndGold on May 05, 2013, 04:29:02 PM
Shumpert's rebounding, assist, and steals numbers were way better than Vander's though.
I believe that Shumpert drew more than one charge during his college career.
Quote from: Avenue Commons on May 05, 2013, 09:53:33 PM
I think a good comparison is Aaron Brooks.
The quarterback?
Quote from: flash on May 05, 2013, 08:11:45 PM
Well said, I think Vander is going to surprise a lot of people in the Draft, a first round selection is not out of the question. Vander has something special in his game that will catch the eye of a GM somewhere. I think his intangibles, defense, and athletic ability will find him a nice home somewhere in the NBA.
Actually, it is. There is a greater chance that Vander will not be drafted at all, than he will be drafted in the first round.
Quote from: LittleMurs on May 05, 2013, 10:42:22 PM
Actually, it is. There is a greater chance that Vander will not be drafted at all, than he will be drafted in the first round.
A lot of people would have said the same about Jimmy and Lazar, just saying, its possible...
Quote from: Avenue Commons on May 05, 2013, 09:53:33 PM
I think a good comparison is Aaron Brooks.
Brooks is shoot-first PG who's about 5'10" and a buck-sixty. Aaron Brooks the QB might actually be more accurate.
Quote from: LittleMurs on May 05, 2013, 10:42:22 PM
Actually, it is. There is a greater chance that Vander will not be drafted at all, than he will be drafted in the first round.
Where are you getting this info from? I would say at worst he will be selected in the mid second round, I cannot imagine with how weak the draft class is that he would go undrafted. I believe he is an early 2nd round pick, with best case late 1st round potential, worst case late 2nd round. Why would he leave if he received a grade that was not guaranteeing him to be picked in the draft.
Quote from: Terror Skink on May 05, 2013, 05:24:12 PM
Good point about the point guard...but he doesn't do that in the NBA. You are correct that he is bigger.
Shumpert has the ball a lot when he's in the game for the Knicks. Even though Felton is the team's nominal PG, the Knicks don't have the typical PG-handles-ball-and-distributes offense. They do a lot of isolation and a
real lot of 3-point shooting.
Carmelo, JR Smith and Shumpert are just as likely to have the ball and do something with it -- usually shoot, as they all are ball-hoggish -- as Felton is. And each of those 3 is more likely to have the ball these days than Kidd, who has become mostly a spot-up 3-point shooter as he approaches 70 years old.
Quote from: bkooncy on May 06, 2013, 10:12:00 AM
Where are you getting this info from? I would say at worst he will be selected in the mid second round, I cannot imagine with how weak the draft class is that he would go undrafted. I believe he is an early 2nd round pick, with best case late 1st round potential, worst case late 2nd round. Why would he leave if he received a grade that was not guaranteeing him to be picked in the draft.
I haven't seen a mock draft that has him going in the mid second round (picks 41 to 50). DraftExpress has Vander going late in the second round at #53. The draft has sixty picks. NBADraft.net has Vander rated in the sixties as a prospect. CBS has him in the seventies. Thus, based on those 3 prognosticators, much as we like Vander, he's iffy to get drafted. Going in the first round would be a shock. Since 2 out of these 3 have Vander going undrafted, and none have him going in the first round, I believe that Vander is more likely to be undrafted then to be drafted in the first round.
Reportedly, Vander wasn't liking school. It isn't for everyone. As a professional player, which Vander will be somewhere, he gets paid and can spend more time on his game without classroom obligations.
Quote from: bkooncy on May 06, 2013, 10:12:00 AM
Where are you getting this info from? I would say at worst he will be selected in the mid second round, I cannot imagine with how weak the draft class is that he would go undrafted. I believe he is an early 2nd round pick, with best case late 1st round potential, worst case late 2nd round. Why would he leave if he received a grade that was not guaranteeing him to be picked in the draft.
There's 77 early entrants to the draft (http://www.nba.com/2013/news/05/01/2013-draft-early-entry-candidates-official-release/index.html). There's only 60 picks. Only 30 of them get guaranteed contracts. Why does anyone declare for the draft?
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on May 06, 2013, 07:30:48 AM
Brooks is shoot-first PG who's about 5'10" and a buck-sixty. Aaron Brooks the QB might actually be more accurate.
I laughed when I saw the comparison too.
Tony Allen would be my comparison. Won't provide a ton of offense but could be a lock down defender and possible starter if he reaches max potential.
Quote from: joe pop on May 09, 2013, 07:55:33 AM
Tony Allen would be my comparison. Won't provide a ton of offense but could be a lock down defender and possible starter if he reaches max potential.
Tony Allen is the best comparison for Vander's ceiling. They're roughly the same size. They're long, athletic and good defenders but not great outside shooters. For fringe NBA players, finding a niche is key. If VB can become a lock-down defender, he'll have a nice career in the NBA.
Agree on the niche comment. Its all about what situation he's in. Just like Jimmy Butler got a chance in Chicago Blue needs a team that will give him a chance to fill a Tony Allen type role.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on May 09, 2013, 08:29:27 AM
Tony Allen is the best comparison for Vander's ceiling. They're roughly the same size. They're long, athletic and good defenders but not great outside shooters. For fringe NBA players, finding a niche is key. If VB can become a lock-down defender, he'll have a nice career in the NBA.
At Vander's ceiling, he still won't be a great outside shooter. So he will a slasher in the NBA?Not! Vander is a better shooter than Tony Allen now. He can only get better.
Quote from: joe pop on May 09, 2013, 01:51:51 PM
Agree on the niche comment. Its all about what situation he's in. Just like Jimmy Butler got a chance in Chicago Blue needs a team that will give him a chance to fill a Tony Allen type role.
Thibideau was raving (or what constitutes raving for him) about JFB from the get go. He didn't need to find a niche - the Bulls were looking for one for him.
Quote from: Sunbelt15 on May 09, 2013, 02:24:18 PM
At Vander's ceiling, he still won't be a great outside shooter. So he will a slasher in the NBA?Not! Vander is a better shooter than Tony Allen now. He can only get better.
From 3, Vander shot 27.7% for his career and just 30.3% last season. Allen in the NBA is shooting 26.9% from a farther line against significantly better competition. Neither guy's strength is outside shooting and I don't think it ever will be.
Vander needs to work on his spot-up shooting. He needs a tick or something to get him in rhythm when spotting up (like a batter in baseball). He can get his own rhythm off the dribble, especially because he jumps so high on his shot, but being able to spot up is different and it's something he struggles with.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on May 09, 2013, 02:42:52 PM
Thibideau was raving (or what constitutes raving for him) about JFB from the get go. He didn't need to find a niche - the Bulls were looking for one for him.
You cant argue that the Bulls arent the best situation for Jimmy. I doubt he wouldve had the opportunties this early in his career to contribute if he were on another team.
Quote from: joe pop on May 10, 2013, 02:43:57 PM
You cant argue that the Bulls arent the best situation for Jimmy. I doubt he wouldve had the opportunties this early in his career to contribute if he were on another team.
Bobcats?
Quote from: joe pop on May 10, 2013, 02:43:57 PM
You cant argue that the Bulls arent the best situation for Jimmy. I doubt he wouldve had the opportunties this early in his career to contribute if he were on another team.
Why?
He got PT because he has a unique and defensive minded coach. There are lots of other veterans on the team so he didnt need to be the main scorer. Therefore he has gotten comfortable just being a beast on D and now his offensive game is starting to come along. The NBA is all about getting in the right situation and I think this was a perfect one for Butler. Im not saying he wouldnt have been a good pro if he wasnt on the Bulls. I just think this was the best situation for him to shine.
I can't wait to see Vander's height at the combine. Using the eye test, Shumpert clearly looks like the bigger man by an appreciable amount. But if Shump is only 6' 4.25" tall, is Vander even 6'3"?
At 6'5" Vander would be in the NBA for many years - at 6'3" - I don't know. Those couple of inches are huge. JFB will be around for a long time. At 6'6", he can guard 3 positions with the best
Scout says Shumpert comparison too optimistic
http://painttouches.com/2013/05/13/nba-scout-blue-can-be-a-poor-mans-tony-allen/
Quote from: Sunbelt15 on May 09, 2013, 02:24:18 PM
At Vander's ceiling, he still won't be a great outside shooter. So he will a slasher in the NBA?Not! Vander is a better shooter than Tony Allen now. He can only get better.
See new thread, COULD be POOR MANS Tony Allen haha
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on May 09, 2013, 03:09:27 PM
From 3, Vander shot 27.7% for his career and just 30.3% last season. Allen in the NBA is shooting 26.9% from a farther line against significantly better competition and with an extra 9 years to work on his shot. Neither guy's strength is outside shooting and I don't think it ever will be.